US states sue Trump over his move to scrap greenhouse gases ruling

A formidable alliance comprising 23 states alongside 17 major cities, counties, and state agencies has initiated a significant legal challenge against the Trump administration. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals, contests the administration’s recent revocation of the pivotal 2009 “endangerment finding”—a foundational scientific determination from the Obama era that formally classified greenhouse gases as a public health threat. This landmark ruling had served as the legal bedrock for numerous federal regulations designed to reduce emissions from vehicles, power plants, and other industrial sources.

New York State Attorney General Letitia James, leading the coalition that includes jurisdictions such as New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, condemned the administration’s action. “The climate crisis is here, and it is already reshaping the way we live. Instead of helping Americans face our new reality, the Trump administration has chosen denial, repealing critical protections,” James stated. This legal move follows a separate but similar challenge filed by several environmental organizations last month.

The administration’s repeal, touted by President Trump as a major achievement against what he termed the Democratic Party’s “radical” energy policies, represents the latest effort in a prolonged campaign to dismantle Obama-era climate initiatives. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin characterized the deregulation as “the single largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States of America.”

The plaintiffs argue that overturning the endangerment finding directly violates statutory provisions within the Clean Air Act. The legal petition emerges against a backdrop of broader environmental policy shifts under the current administration, including the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord and the rollback of automobile fuel economy standards. The Environmental Protection Agency has not publicly responded to requests for comment regarding the litigation.